Reliability Since the compatibility filter has already eliminated all of the operating systems except Windows, we now have to figure out which version of Windows in the most reliable. Windows 95, NT 3.51, and older versions are not even being considered since Microsoft is trying to get everybody upgraded to newer versions as quickly as possible. This is a good thing, considering that Windows 95 has the worst memory leaks of any mainstream OS I have ever used. That leaves us with four to choose from: Windows 98, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows NT 4.0 Workstation and Windows Me. Microsoft recently commissioned ZD Labs to compare the reliability of Windows 2000 Professional with that of Windows 98 Second Edition (SE) and Windows NT Workstation 4.0 with Service Pack 6a (SP6a). In the absence of a standard desktop reliability benchmark, ZD Labs created a custom stress test and ran it on each operating system for thirty consecutive days around the clock, or ninety eight-hour workdays. The results of this test are shown below: I would summarize these results myself but I think ZDLabs' summary speaks for itself: "While the experiences of individual users may vary from our test results, the reliability of Windows 2000 Professional was outstanding. It performed continuously and flawlessly for more than ninety business workdays without a single failure. Not only did it not encounter any problems during this extended period of testing, but also the amount of work done was considerably more than that of a typical user. Although testing with different applications might show different results, based on our testing we conclude that the reliability of Windows 2000 Professional far exceeds that of Windows 98 SE and Windows NT Workstation 4.0." Although Windows Me was not included in this test, the general consensus among the experts I've consulted with is that Windows Me is a real disappointment. Although Microsoft's marketing machine wants you to think that Me is an upgrade to Windows 98, Windows Me is, as one expert phrased it, "more prone to the blue screen of death and other annoying crashes". Another professional user said, "My systems were actually less stable with Me than they were with Windows 98SE". And a major Windows magazine summed up their opinion of Me's reliability by saying, "Opting for Windows Me is a mistake in any situation". Now, I don't know about you, but that sounds like an operating system worth avoiding to me, especially for trading purposes. When it comes to reliability, Windows 2000 Professional is the clear winner. But since reliability isn't the only quality to look for, let's advance the two most reliable performers in this category to the final stage of our search for the best operating system.
I'm an IT guy. Have been supporting M$ products since DOS 6.2. XP=Extra Painful. IMHO, 2000 Pro has demonstrated itself as being one of the most versatile and stable systems. I work in an environment of over 2000 users on a major Fortune 500 company. We have used 95/98/ME/NT/2000 Macs and XP. There are underlying issues with XP that are not readily visible to the casual user. Check out the register at http://www.theregister.co.uk/. Chris
Here's a neat little site for comparing the pros and cons of various Windows systems. www.annoyances.org
Just wanted to let everyone using Win XP Pro know that the first Service Pack - SP 1 is available at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/downloads/servicepacks/sp1/default.asp I bought XP Pro a while back with a new 120 gig 8 MB buffer hard drive and was waiting for this to install it. Hope I don't have too many hardware/software conflicts. From doing more research on this I've found out pretty much what many of you have been saying that XP works best with newer hardware and software. I talked to the former Senior Technology Editor of Winmag.com, and he recommended XP Pro so that was what pushed me into going with XP rather than Win 2k. But I hear both are good once set up properly. BCE PS The fellow mentioned above has a once-a-week newsletter devoted to hints, tips, tricks, news and goodies for Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP users. http://www.Win2kPowerUsers.com/ Moderated and edited by Serdar Yegulalp, former Senior Technology Editor of Winmag.com.
I've been very happy with XP Pro which I have on 2 computers with 4 monitors each, Matrox cards. I find it better than 2000 but everyone's experience will be different.
(My first post! I have been observing this forum of vast information for some time--thank you all for taking the time to SHARE!) One thing I can say with complete confidence and experience is that Windows 2000 is very reliable--wait--extremely reliable. I have NEVER had a boot, hang, or halt problem. BSOD :eek: ("blue screen of death")--Never. Read ET's own Hardware section: http://www.elitetrader.com/ha/guide/index.cfm?s=12&t=61&p=2 I've read other independent reviews and they all agree--go with Windows 2000. It's meant for business, not gaming. Another consideration in considering 2K over XP for me was length in service. XP is newer than 2K. I never go with the "latest and greatest" when it comes to an Operating System--too many bugs and subsequent patches. Rephrasing someone else, "Windows 2000--Period". Let's put it this way, you can't go wrong by choosing Windows 2000, if your choice is Microsoft. Best wishes!
2000. XP (even with SP1) has some issues with VBScript. This may or may not be an issue for you. Personally I love the eye candy of XP but for serious work, stay with 2000 for now.
Magna has a good point, XP really is not that different from 2K right now until they released the next version which will include the CLR (common lanuage runtime) that enabled it to do all the .NET stuff Microsoft has been developing. But the UI differences is totally irrelavent because you can always replace the "explore.exe" by tweaking the registry and download a new interface from various website, you can even turn your windows machine into a Mac lookalike if you want. But XP has some advantages in terms of compatibility with the latest gadgets and whatnot, but 2K can do the same but require some downloading of latest drivers. But like Magna said, the licensing issue is a problem because we are used to having a CD and just loading the OS into multiple machine, but now they tag the hardware so they know when you're trying to put it in a new machine and would disallow it. Stay with 2K Pro for now until "Longhorn" comes out, I believe that will be 64bit and may run on the Intel Itanium2 (or 3 by that time). If you still running 98, ME, or stuff like that, you need to buy a new machine.